Science... isn't completely settled. Ever. It's just... at a point where we can treat it as true. There's always the possibility that something we don't yet understand is, in fact, the case. The usual mostly-joke example I give is that, well, I can't prove that my desk isn't a shape-shifting alien. And that's equally true of evolution, AGW, gravity, germ theory, atomic theory, and so on.
I agree with eri: Anyone can add to a thread, write on a blog, write a letter to the editor, or even write a book.
So we see the need for peer reviewed articles, so people do not waste time on junk.
I read all 300 pages. The author is well reread and intelligent. But he misunderstands and misquotes science.
His tone of desperation is eerily similar to that of some AGW deniers.
No doubt, anyone can say anything they want. At one time the geocentric solar system was the scientific consensus of over 97% of all scientists. They even had actual working models to show how the whole thing worked. However there were flaws in this models. No one was able to accurately calculate where the planets would be in 5 years. And even after calling the people who saw that the math supported the solar centric system, believers of the geo centric solar system still called them names like deniers and skeptics. In time more and more people became educated in the sciences and fewer people accepted the consensus. Hopefully we'll be able to repeat history and people will accept that the consensus has no idea if it will be warmer or colder in the future.
That is true to an egotist who thinks the world and all universes revolve around him or her. But it is not sanity. Sir Isaac Newton had a working model of this universe as they knew it and it sure didn't show the Earth as the central point. So way back then true science knew what is what.
Science is settled in peer-reviewed journals. Anyone can write and publish a book; there is no oversight to make sure the information in the book is factually accurate. No, the people who write stuff like that are not scientists. They're just nutjobs.
If you analyze the Earth and Sun, leaving the Earth at the center and the Sun rotating around it, are Kepler's formulas violated? The part about an ellipse with the earth at one focus is true.
And I have some land in the Maldives for you.
Global warming is happening
http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2010...
And we are causing it
http://c1planetsavecom.wpengine.netdna-c...
The ten warmest years in the instrumental record are 2010, 2005, 2009, 2007, 2002, 1998, 2006, 2003, 2011 and 2012.
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/
It claims, contrary to Galileo and Copernicus, that the Sun and stars go around the Earth. Does that mean the science is not settled?
